I am baffled at the lack of coverage of the District 1 council race in north Arlington.

The candidate was never asked his positions on many municipal issues.

Some of these issues are the completion of Viridian, the city’s portion of the beautification costs, the Lamar overlay project, road expansion or possible contraction for that project, cost absorption by whom, who is footing the tab for the beautification of North Collins Street toward Viridian, and basic issues such as sparse or slow enforcement of municipal codes.

Never miss a local story.

Sign up today for a free 30 day free trial of unlimited digital access.

Help me out: If I hear gun rights advocates correctly, they want to carry guns to protect themselves in the event they are attacked or a shooter begins randomly firing.

That’s not totally logical, but I can see their thinking.

So tell me exactly why someone would carry a replica or carving of a gun (as several people did to Arlington council).

Maybe I missed something, but I don’t see protection applying here.

Their argument that they are just trying to get the public comfortable with guns is like walking around naked so people will get used to it.

Carrying fake guns in public places is nothing more than an attention-getting stunt. It’s just saying “hey look at me.”

It reminds me of a guy I saw walking without a shirt. He thought it was cool, but I suspect everyone he passed thought, “what a jerk.”

— David H. Towson, Fort Worth

UT Board of Regents

Your editorial today was excellent in advocating Regent Wallace Hall’s termination of service as a UT System Regent, by whatever means.

According to the Hardin Report to the Transparency Committee, Hall has repeatedly violated important standards of conduct for a fiduciary, having disregarded multiple warnings from many responsible sources.

Under these circumstances, in my opinion, a “no confidence vote” by the Board of Regents is, as you say, “the very least” that should happen.

I am concerned with your statement “if none of those things happen” (which I interpret to include the “no confidence vote”).

I submit that a vote of “no confidence” should not satisfy the Transparency Committee in lieu of impeachment, if Hall does not resign.

The Committee should “move forward with the impeachment” even if there is such a vote.

The only long term solution to this kind of problem, and others like it, is removal of the offender from office and denial of the opportunity to vote and to disrupt the orderly administration of an academic institution.

The specter of “chilling” legitimate exercise of good governance is a false justification for opposing impeachment in this case.

This is the easy case because of the extreme conduct.

This brand of conduct should, at the “very least,” be “chilled.”

The conduct of Regents Gene Powell and Alex Cranberg should also be examined closely by the Transparency Committee.

Thank you for speaking out on this issue that affects the governance of all of higher education in Texas and the appointive process, as well as excellence in education in Texas generally.